Player Discussion Tony DeAngelo - Part II

[McRanger]

Nope, but that’s not what your post said.

It exactly what it said: that he's not your typical "problem player" (ie the kind of guy who ends up in the tabloids or the police blotter, like the hundreds we've seen over the years) and probably just a person who rubs people (especially the guy responsible for not giving him ice time aka his coach) the wrong way. So I don't see how that is libelous at all.

Unless you mean towards Theo Fleury and Kevin Stevens. Honestly I think both would appreciate the use of a little artistic license to make their stories sound more whimsical and less horrifically tragic.

 

[Inferno]

I don't think anyone is saying DeAngelo is this or DeAngelo is that...almost all of us are trying to think of reasons why he wouldn't be playing because his on ice play would seem to dictate he should be playing.

It's either that or Quinn is just an idiot who doesn't see how well (relatively) DeAngelo is playing. That's really all I can come up with.

 

[McRanger]

I don't think anyone is saying DeAngelo is this or DeAngelo is that...almost all of us are trying to think of reasons why he wouldn't be playing because his on ice play would seem to dictate he should be playing.

It's either that or Quinn is just an idiot who doesn't see how well (relatively) DeAngelo is playing. That's really all I can come up with.

Thats probably the truth.

 

[Kovalev27]

I don't think anyone is saying DeAngelo is this or DeAngelo is that...almost all of us are trying to think of reasons why he wouldn't be playing because his on ice play would seem to dictate he should be playing.

It's either that or Quinn is just an idiot who doesn't see how well (relatively) DeAngelo is playing. That's really all I can come up with.

Exactly. We’re speculating as to what’s going on behind the scenes because on the ice can’t be the reason why he keeps sitting and it’s certainly not because others are playing better.

 

[nyr2k2]

I don't think it's Quinn being an idiot. Because the same issue existed with AV, Tippett, and to an extent, Yzerman. Seems unlikely that all four of those guys would be unable to recognize that he's at least capable out there.

 

[McRanger]

I don't think it's Quinn being an idiot. Because the same issue existed with AV, Tippett, and to an extent, Yzerman. Seems unlikely that all four of those guys would be unable to recognize that he's at least capable out there.

Most coaches have the same mindset. They still exist in a time where they watch a D-man play a 60 second shift in his own zone and think "wow what a defensive warrior, they were in the zone that long and didnt score" instead of asking "Why were we trapped in the zone for 60 seconds?" Offensive D who aren't established are always going to have less rope.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

I don't think it's Quinn being an idiot. Because the same issue existed with AV, Tippett, and to an extent, Yzerman. Seems unlikely that all four of those guys would be unable to recognize that he's at least capable out there.

It definitely is lol. Duclair is playing very good, how many coaches did he go through? Happens all the time with some players

 

[tradenashnow]

They can't trade this kid soon enough. He sucks and he will never be any good. Hopefully, there are GM's stupid enough to trade for him. I have great confidence there are. I've said for many years that 95% of all GM's in sports are morons. I pray our GM is in the 5% that isn't.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Most coaches have the same mindset. They still exist in a time where they watch a D-man play a 60 second shift in his own zone and think "wow what a defensive warrior, they were in the zone that long and didnt score" instead of asking "Why were we trapped in the zone for 60 seconds?" Offensive D who aren't established are always going to have less rope.

This is the most likely explanation. DeAngelo is a higher-risk player than others, so he isn't going to have the same leash as other defenseman who are safer and more "dependable".

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Most coaches have the same mindset. They still exist in a time where they watch a D-man play a 60 second shift in his own zone and think "wow what a defensive warrior, they were in the zone that long and didnt score" instead of asking "Why were we trapped in the zone for 60 seconds?" Offensive D who aren't established are always going to have less rope.

This is Danny Girardi's music

 

[Edge]

Most coaches have the same mindset. They still exist in a time where they watch a D-man play a 60 second shift in his own zone and think "wow what a defensive warrior, they were in the zone that long and didnt score" instead of asking "Why were we trapped in the zone for 60 seconds?" Offensive D who aren't established are always going to have less rope.

Within reason, but ADA has also been on teams with players in his age range, and younger, who wouldn't be considered defensive whiz kids either.

It is a bit a strange that all of them would be that demanding on ADA.

 

[Irishguy42]

Within reason, but ADA has also been on teams with players in his age range, and younger, who wouldn't be considered defensive whiz kids either.

It is a bit a strange that all of them would be that demanding on ADA.

Draft position/pedigree?

 

[Edge]

Draft position/pedigree?

That tends to buy most players more time/opportunities, not less.

 

[McRanger]

Within reason, but ADA has also been on teams with players in his age range, and younger, who wouldn't be considered defensive whiz kids either.

It is a bit a strange that all of them would be that demanding on ADA.

Its not about being good or bad defensively its about recognizing what good or bad defense is.

ADA makes noticeable errors, like getting caught pinching or having ambitious passes intercepted. Coaches see that and remember that and assume that he's worse defensively than other defenseman who don't make those obvious errors but also aren't very good at preventing the team from gaining the zone, shooting the puck or scoring goals.

It may have been an "AV thing" in the sense that it was more bizarre since he preaches a puck movement system and liked D that couldn't move the puck, but really its a coaches thing.

"Offensive D-men" who aren't prime time talents and/or established players are always going to have rougher time than their "defensive" counterparts. Thats why this dumpster fire of a year would be a good time to see what he has.

 

[Edge]

Its not about being good or bad defensively its about recognizing what good or bad defense is.

ADA makes noticeable errors, like getting caught pinching or having ambitious passes intercepted. Coaches see that and remember that and assume that he's worse defensively than other defenseman who don't make those obvious errors but also aren't very good at preventing the team from gaining the zone, shooting the puck or scoring goals.

It may have been an "AV thing" in the sense that it was more bizarre since he preaches a puck movement system and liked D that couldn't move the puck, but really its a coaches thing.

"Offensive D-men" who aren't prime time talents and/or established players are always going to have rougher time than their "defensive" counterparts. Thats why this dumpster fire of a year would be a good time to see what he has.

The thing is that coaches don't act in a vacuum.

They consult with their assistants and other members of the organziation. In ADA's case, I'm sure he's also come up in conversations with Gorton and the front office. So it's not just on a coach per se.

So that would mean a double digit amount of people are all missing something.

Or, and this is probably the most plausible but least interesting, they simply don't trust him and don't think he's applying the things they are trying to teach him.

I know that's not as bold as getting into the psychological tendencies of coaches, or what kind of teammate ADA is or isn't, or other factors. But it's probably the one that is closer to the source of the problem.

They see things they don't like, they don't see the commitment to improve them, and so he sits.

Whether he should be sitting or not is an understandable debate. But I don't know if there's really too much depth to the "why" of the situation, even if we don't necessarily agree with it.

 

[nyr2k2]

It definitely is lol. Duclair is playing very good, how many coaches did he go through? Happens all the time with some players

Duclair had been scratched as recently as like two weeks ago. He has been benched on and off all year. He had a stretch of 14 games without a point this year and is on pace for under 30 points. He's not playing well at all if you look at his season overall. And I said it just a few pages ago--there are plenty of similarities between ADA and Duclair.

Anyway, yes, this does happen with players. And it's not because coaches are blind idiots. When guys go through several coaches who don't play them regularly it's likely due to something else other than their play. Something that we may or may not know about.

But you can keep sticking your head in the sand, telling yourself that it's just stupid coaches and GMs. Over and over and over. LOL.

 

[Sarge13]

"....they simply don't trust him and don't think he's applying the things they are trying to teach him." Edge

This.

And it goes back to junior hockey too.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Its not about being good or bad defensively its about recognizing what good or bad defense is.

ADA makes noticeable errors, like getting caught pinching or having ambitious passes intercepted. Coaches see that and remember that and assume that he's worse defensively than other defenseman who don't make those obvious errors but also aren't very good at preventing the team from gaining the zone, shooting the puck or scoring goals.

It may have been an "AV thing" in the sense that it was more bizarre since he preaches a puck movement system and liked D that couldn't move the puck, but really its a coaches thing.

"Offensive D-men" who aren't prime time talents and/or established players are always going to have rougher time than their "defensive" counterparts. Thats why this dumpster fire of a year would be a good time to see what he has.

I agree with you and all of this for the most part. But the only thing I might add is that Risk Mitigation is a trait and a pretty important one for NHL defensemen. This is where the "ADA makes noticeable errors, like getting caught pinching or having ambitious passes intercepted" part comes in.

Too much of that is obviously a problem. I'm not even saying ADA does it too much, either. More playing devils advocate on why he might be having a tough time staying in the lineup somtimes. Maybe it's something he and Quinn and hte video guys have talked about.

Bottom line is me or you or anyone else here really just don't know why he gets scratched sometimes. But I definitely agree he looks like he's easily a top6 defenseman on this team and given where the club is at with the 'rebuild' he should be playing every game.

 

[Off Sides]

Smith, Shattenkirk, Pionk in comparison are trust worthy? And if they are applying what the Rangers are teaching, that is a good thing?

That to me is the crux of it, anything said about ADA's deficiencies, can be said about pretty much any of their D, so why the different treatments? Why are we as fans supposed to trust the Rangers opinions or what they are teaching concerning defenseman? This is not Nashville who are churning out top pair and top 4 D.

 

[nyr2k2]

Smith, Shattenkirk, Pionk in comparison are trust worthy? And if they are applying what the Rangers are teaching, that is a good thing?

That to me is the crux of it, anything said about ADA's deficiencies, can be said about pretty much any of their D, so why the different treatments? Why are we as fans supposed to trust the Rangers opinions or what they are teaching concerning defenseman? This is not Nashville who are churning out top pair and top 4 D.

You're right--like Pionk in particular. Why does he play every game while ADA sits? Why are these other defensive abominations playing when ADA isn't? All things being equal, ADA should absolutely play. And that's just it: the most logical explanation to me is that all things are not equal. And I don't mean that the coaches hold this kid to one standard and Pionk et al to something else (and that all his previous coaches have had the same double standards). I mean that it's likely that he's doing something or not doing something to himself to create the situation.

If it happens once, it's fair to question if the coach is just being obstinate. Twice? Makes you wonder. Three times? Okay now. Four times? At that point I think you really need to look at the player, and not some bias against guys like him or coaches and GMs being idiots.

 

[Inferno]

You're right--like Pionk in particular. Why does he play every game while ADA sits? Why are these other defensive abominations playing when ADA isn't? All things being equal, ADA should absolutely play. And that's just it: the most logical explanation to me is that all things are not equal. And I don't mean that the coaches hold this kid to one standard and Pionk et al to something else (and that all his previous coaches have had the same double standards). I mean that it's likely that he's doing something or not doing something to himself to create the situation.

If it happens once, it's fair to question if the coach is just being obstinate. Twice? Makes you wonder. Three times? Okay now. Four times? At that point I think you really need to look at the player, and not some bias against guys like him or coaches and GMs being idiots.

That's a totally fair take...I just really wish I knew what it was...becauee not knowing, well , it does make you wonder if there guys are all idiots. I know it's not their job to inform us...but man...it sure would be nice to have reporters who actually wondered about this stuff and dig a little deeper into it.

 

[Off Sides]

You're right--like Pionk in particular. Why does he play every game while ADA sits? Why are these other defensive abominations playing when ADA isn't? All things being equal, ADA should absolutely play. And that's just it: the most logical explanation to me is that all things are not equal. And I don't mean that the coaches hold this kid to one standard and Pionk et al to something else (and that all his previous coaches have had the same double standards). I mean that it's likely that he's doing something or not doing something to himself to create the situation.

If it happens once, it's fair to question if the coach is just being obstinate. Twice? Makes you wonder. Three times? Okay now. Four times? At that point I think you really need to look at the player, and not some bias against guys like him or coaches and GMs being idiots.

My theory is they just do not like ADA. Who they is or why I have no idea.

Which in my opinion is fine, they can choose who they like or not, but asset wise them still using the players they do not like, to try to turn them into a different asset they like more is the way to go.

I believe the Rangers got too caught up in this culture thing this year. While I think that is important, it's a step that I think needs to be applied with more of an eye on asset management.

 

[Edge]

The conversation essentially falls into one of two broad categories for me.

1. Personally, I think ADA should be playing more and its sink or swim time.

2. The fact that ADA isn't playing is most likely tied to the coaches not feeling like he's showing them what they're asking for, or listening to them.

To the second point, this might be a broader problem that has likely manifested itself under different coaching staffs, with very different personalities, and styles, and systems, and approaches.

If this was isolated to just Quinn, I might be a little more suspect. But there's clearly "something" that is creating roadblocks, and that something is probably the least "juicy" of the different theories floated out there.

 

[The Crypto Guy]

You're right--like Pionk in particular. Why does he play every game while ADA sits? Why are these other defensive abominations playing when ADA isn't? All things being equal, ADA should absolutely play. And that's just it: the most logical explanation to me is that all things are not equal. And I don't mean that the coaches hold this kid to one standard and Pionk et al to something else (and that all his previous coaches have had the same double standards). I mean that it's likely that he's doing something or not doing something to himself to create the situation.

If it happens once, it's fair to question if the coach is just being obstinate. Twice? Makes you wonder. Three times? Okay now. Four times? At that point I think you really need to look at the player, and not some bias against guys like him or coaches and GMs being idiots.

Because he's a good old NCAA boy, just like our head coach is.

Pionk has been pitiful on the defense end but gets free pass after free pass.

 

[Edge]

That's a totally fair take...I just really wish I knew what it was...becauee not knowing, well , it does make you wonder if there guys are all idiots. I know it's not their job to inform us...but man...it sure would be nice to have reporters who actually wondered about this stuff and dig a little deeper into it.

But I kind of feel like some of the reporters have dropped some nuggets out there.

I think the Athletic touched on the subject just the other day with a story talking about the good and not so good of ADA in the lineup. I believe Brooks has relayed similar aspects.

That's why I really don't think it's quite as big of a mystery as we believe. Now, we may not agree with what's being said. But I don't feel like it's a foreign concept either.